an identification must have contemplated, in the case of babies at least, only the most superficial resemblance between two "tou" (whorls), or two "ki" (loops), or two "lo" (arches). Of course an arch could be distinguished from a whorl or a loop without a magnifier, but to distinguish between two arches for instance, having a degree of likeness closely approximating identity (see Fig. 10 a and b), the absence of the magnifier would certainly preclude any such accurate discrimination as is absolutely necessary to-day. Aside from the prints themselves, this absence of any realization of and reliance upon the individuality of the friction-skin configuration seems clearly shown by Rashidudden, the famous Persian historian, who wrote in 1303 as follows (extract from "Cathay," by H. Yule, Vol. III., p. 123): Extracted from the Historical Cyclopedia of Rashidudden. . . ... Lastly, the business arrives at the sixth board, which is called Siushtah. All ambassadors and foreign merchants when arriving and departing have to present themselves at this office, which is the one which issues orders in council and passports. . . . 66 When matters have passed these six boards, they are remitted to the Council of State, or Sing, where they are discussed, and the decision is issued after being verified by the Khat Angusht or finger-signature" of all who have a right to a voice in the Council. This "finger-signature" indicates that the act, to which it is attached in attestation, has been discussed and definitely approved by those whose mark has thus been put upon it. It is usual in Cathay, when any contract is entered into, for the outline of the fingers of the parties to be traced upon the document. For experience shows that no two individuals have fingers precisely alike. The hand of the contracting party is set upon the back of the paper containing the deed, and lines are then traced around his fingers up to the knuckles in order that if ever one of them should deny his obligation this tracing may be compared with his fingers and he may thus be convicted. Here the fingerprint is not even suggested, but a sort of ceremonial is used involving the five fingers, the desired psychic effect being accomplished by very formally tracing lines "around his fingers up to the knuckles," evidently such as the children of to-day trace in playing the game of tit-tat-toe. To us, this is a most crude method of identification, but it must have worked or it would not have been "usual," for the psychology of fear was doubtless as potent then as now, although perhaps not so clearly understood. any rate, this ancient use of fingerprints, finger-outlines and handprints has none but historical interest for us. Nothing of any scientific value has as yet come down to us by virtue of its own worth or momentum as it were, e. g., the silk worm and silk. Galton observes (1897): At No account has yet reached me of trials in any of their courts of law about disputed signatures, in which the identity of the party who was said to have signed with his fingerprint had been established or disproved by comparing it with a print made by him then and there. Fifteen years later (1912) Mr. Laufer observes: Indeed, it is striking that we do not find in any author a clear description of it and its application. The physicians in their exposition of the anatomy of the human body do not allude to it, and it is certain that it was not anatomical or medical studies which called it into existence. It formed part of the domain of folklore, but not of scholarly erudition. In this connection Mr. Laufer makes (p. 645) an interesting citation from A. H. Smith's "Proverbs and Common Sayings from the Chinese," thus: The Chinese, like the Gypsies and many other peoples, tell fortunes by the lines upon the inside of the fingers. The circular striæ upon the finger tips are called “tou,” a peck; while those which are curved, without forming a circle, are styled “ki,” being supposed to resemble a dust pan. Hence the following saying: "One peck, poor; two pecks, rich; three pecks, four pecks, open a pawnshop; five pecks, be a go-between; six pecks, be a thief; seven pecks, meet calamities; eight pecks, eat chaff; nine pecks and one dust pan, no work to do eat till you are old." How different the contributory beginnings of the presentday scientific identification! It was a physician in his exposition of the anatomy of the human body who first called attention to the friction-ridge patterns "M. Malpighi, 1686 A.D., quoted by Alix, 1867, and by Schlaginhaufen, 1905."5 Again, in 1823, another physician, J. E. Purkenje, in a now famous thesis, partially translated by Galton, went still farther and described and classified the various ridge configurations as shown by "plain" impressions. The late Sir William J. Herschel makes an additional citation from this thesis which is interesting; he says: Referring to "the varieties of the tonsils, and especially of the papillæ of the tongue, in different individuals" (no mention of fingers) he finishes his sentence and his essay by saying: "From all of which (varieties) sound materials will be furnished for that individual knowledge of the man which is of no less importance than a general knowledge of him is, especially in the practise of medicine." Herschel adds: "No part of his essay conveys an inkling of identification by means of any of the individual varieties on which he always lays stress, not even his pioneer work in the classification of the markings on fingers." 5 Wilder, "Bibliography of Friction-skin Configuration," Biological Bulletin, Vol. XXX., No. 2, page 249. • Galton, "Finger Prints," pp. 85-88 and plate. 7 Herschel, "The Origin of Finger Printing," p. 35 (1916). Concerning the labors of the late Sir William J. Herschel in the application of the idea of friction-skin identification, Sir Francis Galton, writing at a time when the facts considered were a matter of Galton's personal knowledge, states his conclusions thus: If the use of fingerprints ever becomes of general importance, Sir William Herschel must be regarded as the first who devised a feasible method for regular use, and afterward officially adopted it.8 No allusion is made to the "discovery" of their use by Herschel, the emphasis being on "the first to devise a feasible method for their regular use." Galton had already cited their prior use in his introductory chapter, saying: The second chapter treats of the previous employment of fingerprints among the various nations, which has been almost wholly confined to making daubs, without paying any regard to the delicate lineations with which this book alone is concerned. Their object was partly superstitious and partly ceremonial: superstitious, so far as a personal contact between the finger and the document was supposed to be of mysterious efficacy; ceremonial, as a formal act whose due performance in the presence of others could be attested.10 Again in Chapter II., Though mere smudges, they serve in a slight degree to individualize the signer. . . . The ridges dealt with in this book could not be seen at all in such rude prints, much less could they be utilized as strictly distinctive features.11 Read in connection with Galton's conclusions, Herschel's "Origin of Finger Printing" tells us how the idea of this as a "feasible method" developed in his mind, and gives the evolution of the method " for regular use." "There was nothing very original about that, as an idea," says Herschel, concerning his taking of Konai's handprint.12 The change of method came quickly, but the idea of judicial sanction after many years." Herschel says: 66 Trials with my own fingers soon showed me the advantage of using them instead of the whole hand for the purpose then in view, i. e., for securing a signature which the writer [maker] would obviously hesitate to 8 Galton, "Finger Prints," Ch. II., p. 28. Herschel, "The Origin of Finger Printing," page 32. Here Herschel claims only the "discovery of the value of finger prints." 10 Galton, introductory chapter, page 3. 11 Galton, Ch. II., p. 23. Also Laufer's "History," Plate 3, showing two thumb smudges on a Tibetian promissory note. The print on Plate I., recorded as late as A.D. 1839, is reasonably clear. Its clearness may have been intentional. 12 Herschel, "Origin of Finger Printing," page 8. disown. [The old idea of fear again utilized.] That he might be infallibly convicted of perjury if he did, is a very different matter. That was not settled, and could not have been settled, to the satisfaction of courts of justice, till, after many years, abundant agreement had been reached among ordinary people [jurors?]. The very possibility of such a 66 sanction" to the use of a fingerprint did not dawn upon me till after long experience, and even then it became no more than a personal conviction for many years more.13 The researches of Sir Francis Galton were begun in 1880.14 Their results were epochal. Pre-Galtonian prints were exclusively the "plain" impressions of to-day, amply sufficient for identification, but not for that precise classification so necessary for the modern Fingerprint Record File. Galton's introduction of the "rolled" impression or cylindrical projection of the finger; the utilization of the "minute triangular plot" or delta (Wilder's tri-radius) found in all rolled impressions (except that of the arch) as "corner stones" of his classification system; the substitution for a single "plain" impression of a complete series of ten rolled impressions, with plain impressions of the fingers as a check on printing the rolled impressions in proper sequence; together with his researches concerning the individual persistence of the ridge configuration (the results of which have been accepted as proof of persistency) made possible the present-day scientific systems of fingerprint identification. His conclusions on persistency have been amply confirmed by the late Sir William J. Herschel's series of impressions from two of his own fingers, the first taken in 1859, at the age of twenty-six years; the second, in 1877, and the third, in 1916, at the age of eightythree years, a total interval of fifty-seven years, and, as he remarks: For length of persistence they can not at present be matched.15 As Herschel gave of the fruits of his labors to Calton, so, in turn, Galton gave to Sir Edward Richard Henry, G. C. V. O., Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, London, England. Sir Henry says: In the system here described, many of his (Galton's) terms have been adopted, definitions accepted and suggestions followed whenever practicable.16 Upon this Galtonian foundation Sir Henry built the present 13 Herschel," Origin of Finger Printing," page 9. 14 Galton, "Finger Prints," Ch. I., page 2. 15 Herschel," The Origin of Finger Printing," page 30. 16 Henry, "The Classification and Uses of Finger Prints," 1913, page 5. VOL. VII.-20. |